I have read somewhere (cryptography book?) that for most Indo-European and Romanic languages, the letter distribution is pretty similar to that of English. And I can't think of a language where there are words not containing vowels.
A defining feature of most "open-source" copyleft programs, though, is the ability to make the creator of the derivative work use the same system as you. I wasn't aware that you could do that with traditional copyright.
It would most likely eventually stomp all over iTunes.
Microsoft would just have to package it with Longhorn, and boom, people start blindly clicking on it, not realizing they have an alternative. Suddenly, WindowsTunes skyrockets to a 99.8% digital-download market share, and iTunes dies. Actually, it would probably stop illegal downloading too, so the RIAA would start paying M$ out of their assss.
Does this development get us any closer to the development of a quantum computer? I don't even remember the last I heard about that branch of science...
Why do we really care about terrorists breaking copyright laws?
a) Enough non-terrorists in the US do it anyway that the number of people violating copyrights for terror purposes is negligible, and
b) If they're terrorists, they're probably doing far worse than BitTorrenting files.
Seriously.
When are the Supremes going to rule on Ashcroft v. Raich (the medical marijuana case) and MGM v. Grokster (if you don't know what it is, you don't deserve to live.) ?
That's what we care about!
(DISCLAIMER: I'm not of legal drinking age yet, so I shouldn't and won't profess an interest in this...it could well be overturned by the time I'm allowed to buy the wine legally...)
"We have a point of infraction!"
I don't think this week will turn out to be all that important. The game/music/movie console has existed for quite a while: it's called my PC. And Google releases something that looks really, really important/cool about every two weeks; most just slide into obscurity within a couple of days. The Web Accelerator may last a little longer than others, but I doubt it'll make as big of a difference as, say, Gmail did.
MS isn't really going along with what you're saying.
Instead of thumbing their noses at the DOJ and saying, "See? Lookie, lookie, we have competition! Ha ha ha!", they're treating Firefox as The New Ultimate Enemy, and resorting to every trick in the book to try to eradicate it. They'd rather stifle the competition than embrace it. At the end of the day, the DOJ might turn out to have been right after all.
Slashdot Mirror
My point was that stuff like Creative Commons very much streamlines the process - it's not inherent in the copyright itself.
I have read somewhere (cryptography book?) that for most Indo-European and Romanic languages, the letter distribution is pretty similar to that of English. And I can't think of a language where there are words not containing vowels.
A defining feature of most "open-source" copyleft programs, though, is the ability to make the creator of the derivative work use the same system as you. I wasn't aware that you could do that with traditional copyright.
How long until Cringely announces the details of the upcoming Apple/Intel/Nokia merger?
It would most likely eventually stomp all over iTunes. Microsoft would just have to package it with Longhorn, and boom, people start blindly clicking on it, not realizing they have an alternative. Suddenly, WindowsTunes skyrockets to a 99.8% digital-download market share, and iTunes dies. Actually, it would probably stop illegal downloading too, so the RIAA would start paying M$ out of their assss.
Does this development get us any closer to the development of a quantum computer? I don't even remember the last I heard about that branch of science...
Why do we really care about terrorists breaking copyright laws? a) Enough non-terrorists in the US do it anyway that the number of people violating copyrights for terror purposes is negligible, and b) If they're terrorists, they're probably doing far worse than BitTorrenting files. Seriously.
But you can pay 79 cents to burn it to CD, etc. Therefore...
1 upload * 1000 claimed downloads * $5.79 a download = $5,790.
Of course, you could argue for a $990 fine (with iTunes), so it's sort of a moot point.
When are the Supremes going to rule on Ashcroft v. Raich (the medical marijuana case) and MGM v. Grokster (if you don't know what it is, you don't deserve to live.) ? That's what we care about! (DISCLAIMER: I'm not of legal drinking age yet, so I shouldn't and won't profess an interest in this...it could well be overturned by the time I'm allowed to buy the wine legally...)
"We have a point of infraction!" I don't think this week will turn out to be all that important. The game/music/movie console has existed for quite a while: it's called my PC. And Google releases something that looks really, really important/cool about every two weeks; most just slide into obscurity within a couple of days. The Web Accelerator may last a little longer than others, but I doubt it'll make as big of a difference as, say, Gmail did.
MS isn't really going along with what you're saying. Instead of thumbing their noses at the DOJ and saying, "See? Lookie, lookie, we have competition! Ha ha ha!", they're treating Firefox as The New Ultimate Enemy, and resorting to every trick in the book to try to eradicate it. They'd rather stifle the competition than embrace it. At the end of the day, the DOJ might turn out to have been right after all.